|
MTGoxBTC/MTGoxUSD just spiked up to 540 from 366.
|
|
|
|
but I could find no report of Sepa transfer still stuck after 6 weeks, like I'm experiencing now
A SEPA transfer usually takes 1 day to clear. Yes, but Gox supposedly has a quota of 200k EUR per day of SEPA transfers. (It used to be 100k per day, and this was confirmed by someone who actually called their bank in order to ask - I don't know if the bank actually divulged information about Gox (I think that would be illegal) - but probably they asked what kind of limit would a foreign business opening an account have.) For comparison - I casually made a SEPA transfer of 1,000,000 euros from my personal account to a company in a different country. MTGox was having problems in the EU long before they ran into trouble with the US last year. This is from 2011 involving issues in France https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=41317.0 |
|
|
|
I would rather open an account with either AvaTrade or Plus500 and go long on the GoxBTC/GoxUSD currency pair. There is a good chance that this trade can be profitable, and one can then get the USD out and trade then for BTC at market through an exchange that is working.
First of all, kudos to you for understanding counterparty risk. However, I don't think this will work. I checked out both AvaTrade and Plus500 and they close all bitcoin positions monthly, on the same day of the month for all accounts, which almost certainly means that they are putting in a wire transfer request to gox once a month. If that wire doesn't come back and not enough customers show up in the first week-or-so of next month to offset, they will proceed to screw the previous month's customers for the balance, appealing to force majeure. I'm pretty sure their risk management strategy here is to pipeline the whole thing and then drag their feet on withdrawals if the pipeline dries up while gox is in no-wire-transfer mode. It's the Lloyd's reinsurance-to-close scam, writ small. They closing Bitcoin positions monthly has nothing to do with withdrawing funds. One can close a CFD position at any time, and these are instruments designed for short term trading. I have withdrawn USD, my profits, on a weekly basis many times from AvaTrade with no problem after MTGox was not withdrawing USD or CAD. Furthermore they have CFDs for major and some minor currency pairs, stocks, indices precious metals etc. BTC and now LTC is a small part of their business. It is basically a bet on the GoxBTC/GoxUSD rate and there plenty of ways to hedge this on their part with little or no counterparty exposure to MTGox. Will this last? No, mainly because it is only a matter of time before they switch to BitStamp, in fact I suggested they do this myself to them. Edit: I am not suggesting anyone deposit fiat or BTC into MTGox. I voted this as "Incomprehensibly idiotic" |
|
|
|
If BTC withdrawals are fixed on MTGox the price for GoxBTC/GoxUSD, "the fraudachino" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=465071.msg5142129#msg5142129, will sky rocket to well above the BTC/USD price, possibly 200, 300 or more. The more the fear around MTGox the higher the premium. We must keep in mind the USD and other currencies such as CAD, AUD are still trapped in MTGox. The flow of EUR out of MTGox is restricted and the flow of JPY out of MTGox is limited by the number of Japanese residents willing to arbitrage. So one has the same amount of fiat trapped in MTGox chasing BTC, while the BTC are fleeing. As for the impact on the broader BTC/USD market, this is unclear. Yes the BTC trapped in MTGox can be sold on other exchanges; however one must keep in mind this is the same BTC that survived the brutal bear market of "the fraudachino" from a high of 1038 to a low of 302. One can trade "the fraudachino" as a contract for difference on AvaTrade and Plus500 as the currency pair "BTC/USD" for a while until of course these firms wise up to the mess that MTGox has become. Disclosure: At this point I have a small long position on "the fraudachino" via contracts for difference. I am of course also long on BTC as a long term holder. Those BTC are safely backed up in multiple places including I must say a 5.25in floppy disk, and several 3.5in floppy disks, and are consequently a fundamentally different and much safer asset.  |
|
|
|
If there is one site that could make use of this it is: http://thepiratebay.se/. Ironically they accept BTC and LTC but not NMC! If ThePirateBay does not go for NMC, who will? |
|
|
|
I say worth the risk. If Gox comes back then we will see $900 on gox minutes/hrs later.
Yes but the USD are then trapped in MTGox, which is why I suggested the CFD route. |
|
|
|
|
I would rather open an account with either AvaTrade or Plus500 and go long on the GoxBTC/GoxUSD currency pair. There is a good chance that this trade can be profitable, and one can then get the USD out and trade then for BTC at market through an exchange that is working.
This should be considered a very high risk speculative investment when compared to simply holding BTC. There is an even much higher risk in my opinion with depositing either USD or BTC into MTGox, at this time, with a potentially a much lower return.
Edit: This trade idea will not work for US persons.
|
|
|
|
|
For the GoxBTC/GoxUSD currency pair it is possible, for the BTC/USD currency pair very unlikely. One thing to keep in mind here is that if MTGox opens up BTC withdrawals before either one of 1) They completely open up USD withdrawals or 2) They go out of business then the GoxBTC/GoxUSD currency pair could hit 900 or even 1000.
|
|
|
|
OK, let's look at the facts:
...
3) I have personally made many AUD and BTC deposits & withdrawals in and out of Gox over the last few weeks. They respond to my support request on average in about 4 days. I have absolutely no paranoid deluded fear that they are trying to scam me.
...
Did you actually withdraw AUD from MTGox recently? If so, when, how long did it take, and what method for withdrawal did you use? |
|
|
|
|
Make it available for GNU/Linux under an Free Software / Open Source license and then I will be interested, otherwise I will pass.
|
|
|
|
For those wishing to break out of Apple's censorship jail. Here are the keys to your cell: http://allcydia.com/ |
|
|
|
I am concerned about Coinbase hacks, just like many of you. Websites like The Verge and other mainstream tech sites are running articles about seemingly tech savoy individuals being hacked.
For the record, I have very few BTC. That said, I'd put them all in cold storage, but I like that Coinbase syncs with Mint.com.
Is it reasonable to assume that if an individual does the following, they have covered their bases?
1) uses a strong, unique, random string of letters and numbers for a coinbase password
2) uses two factor authentication (using phone numbers that are unique to their cell phones, NOT google voice)
3) uses a strong, unique, random string of letters and numbers for their backup email password
4) avoid junk mail, phishing scams, never opens attachments, doesn't download altcoin wallet apps.
5) EDIT: Only going to websites that are links stored in my browser
Am I missing anything?
Thanks,
Dr. Bitcoin
Yes you have missed something: If you have not done so already, stop using Microsoft Windows and start using GNU/Linux |
|
|
|
|
I have disliked Apple since long before Bitcoin existed because their business model for IOS is based upon the use of DRM for censorship and repression. The net result is that Apple uses the power of the marketplace to promote oppression and servitude, in many was far worse that many oppressive states. One must keep in mind here that the "pen" (The 21st century equivalent requires having control over one's computing) is mightier than the sword (The 21st century equivalent is guns, military power, nukes, chemical weapons etc.). The Bitcoin community is by no means the first to have been the target of Apple's oppression; however what is really gratifying here is that this community is actually doing something about it.
|
|
|
|
Hmmm. Interesting. I guess the only thing that makes me think that there is some "insider information" going on is that Second Market purchased 6000+ coins the last few days and then twittered that they were looking for more today, almost way to eager to pick up as many coins as possible with the drop and Gox issues. They seem to think that getting as much coin as possible right now is a great thing. I wish I knew what they know. They are responding to investor demand, which given the nature of Second Market is indicative of buying by deep pockets. |
|
|
|
|
1260 BTC / USD while holding a short position.
|
|
|
|
737 is now my upside target, so above that sell/short.
On the surface this appears as sound advice. I mean with the recent bearish move and we are still above the trend line (577 BTC / USD For January 2014). Then there is the army of bears bearing iPhones coming out of Mother Russia. There is however one little problem, I just cannot trust that 2009 and early 2010 data. So I am not selling any of my BTC (the bulk of my portfolio is in BTC) and I will pass on those short BTC / USD CFD's in my trading account. Instead I will sit back and watch the Putin Spectacle aka Olympic Ceremony starting about now. If you take only Mt.Gox as your data, we are even more above the trendline. My calculations do confirm the above. I ran both your data including the 2009, and early 2010 data, (reproducing your results) and the MTGox / Bitstamp data from July 2010 with a current trendline of 300 BTC / USD. Adjusting for Bitcoin inflation (basically applying the exponential to the market cap as opposed to the price) produced 328 BTC / USD. So yes the impact of removing the 2009 and early 2010 data is to give a stronger stronger short term sell signal. Having said that let us not get carried away here, there is still a trendline over 2000 USD / BTC for December of this year for the most bearish trendline. |
|
|
|
737 is now my upside target, so above that sell/short.
On the surface this appears as sound advice. I mean with the recent bearish move and we are still above the trend line (577 BTC / USD For January 2014). Then there is the army of bears bearing iPhones coming out of Mother Russia. There is however one little problem, I just cannot trust that 2009 and early 2010 data. So I am not selling any of my BTC (the bulk of my portfolio is in BTC) and I will pass on those short BTC / USD CFD's in my trading account. Instead I will sit back and watch the Putin Spectacle aka Olympic Ceremony starting about now. |
|
|
|
... I am willing to give the OP credit because he did come up with some very good TA ideas; however his "assumed" data for 2009 and early 2010, "the bathwater" is really testing my patience. I mean what is the justification for this BTC / USD rate of 0.005 for January 2009? I mean this is just like a couple of weeks after Satoshi mined the genesis block! So maybe it is time to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
So much blame with so little data that could be used to replace the contested part!
As if I did not know that the first USD/Bitcoin exchange was conducted in January 2009 with an exchange rate of $0.001 per bitcoin? Sirius, who was the seller, told this to me while sitting on the couch of my private club sipping my whisky. You can read from the thread in question, why these individual instances are ignored and rather an average has been used. Until someone has a better idea, that is. ... A better idea is here is really simple. If one does not have data for a particular month then one does not include a data point for that month. Furthermore not including a data point encourages other members of the community research for the missing data, a much more constructive alternative to "blame". If one has data that is questionable, then one has various options: 1) Not include the data, 2) Include the data with a caveat. 3) Provide results with and without the questionable data and let the reader be the judge. All of these are reasonable and can be justified. The choice here can be subjective and the subject of different points of view and debate. What is not acceptable is to make up data to for example replace missing data points. Now let us consider the January 2009 data point. You have a sale at 0.001 BTC / USD rate. The options here are to include the data point at 0.001 BTC / USD rate or not include it as above. These options are of course perfectly reasonable. None of this however provides any justification for a data point of 0.005 BTC / USD. Given the absence of any further evidence (more January 2009 data points to justify an average of 0.005 BTC / USD for January 2009) one can only conclude that this January 2009 data point of 0.005 BTC / USD was simply made up. We now come to the question of blame: Blame needs to be same for the same amount of error. The critical issue to consider here is that we are dealing with a log scale, which means that an error of a factor of 5 on a data point of 0.001 equivalent an error of a factor of 5 on a data point of say 517 (November 2013), so the appropriate amount of blame for the made up January 2009 data point needs to be same as if the November 2013 data point was changed by a factor of five to either 2585 BTC / USD or 103.4 BTC / USD. Since there appears to be is a substantial number of made up data points (January 2009 - May 2010) it becomes apparent that the slope of the trend line can easily be changed as a result of this to yield a "sell" indicator instead of a "buy" or vice versa. |
|
|
|
Any of the start up companies or venture funded companies who are affected negatively by Apple's unreasonable position...
There's plenty of people who would benefit from an IOS app. Apple is certainly depriving a legitimate market for whatever reason and it really should be challenged...
None of the affected companies owns the Bitcoin software. So how are they going to argue in court about something they do not own? They do not need to. A payment processor who is adversely affected by Apple's decision, a merchant who is forced to pay higher transaction fee, the list of businesses who are adversely affected here is endless. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
